A quick glance to the history of the article, I see it was edited by multiple usernames and IP address at different times. How did you come to the conclusion that it was self authored?

To be fair, if I was writing my own Wikipedia page, I would do the same.

Especially as a hacker

I don't think it's a stretch to assume that infosec experts/hackers have ways to falsify their online identities.

Funny to think about: "writing your own Wikipedia page without it getting taken down for Original Research" is a fun first hobby project to certain kinds of network-security people, as much as as "making your Github activity graph solid green" is a fun first hobby project to bot programmers.

They clearly do meet the notability requirements; the cites on this article are almost as long as the article itself. Notability on Wikipedia is a term of art; it refers ("mostly") to how much of the content of the article can be drawn from (ideally diverse) secondary sources. It's not an achievement award.

> Because this is a person that doesn't meet the notoriety requirements for Wikipedia

Very much does, just because you don't know them doesn't mean they don't.

Wikipedia has protections against this. it is not trivial. Each change by random ip also has to be accepted by editor with permissions, and getting these permissions is not easy. It might be possible to bypass all abuse counter measures, but it takes a lot of effort and is not trivial

Easy to check on wikipedia, looks like it was created by the user Ezlev [0], who does not appear to be crimew's wikipedia acocunt, and updated by several other users over the last couple years.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ezlev

Because this literal fugitive hacktivist is clearly incapable of finding creative ways to get diversified contributions to their Wikipedia page. Heck, they even proudly link to their WP page from their personal site. If they didn't write the article themself, then it was most likely a friend who's close enough to write something that screams self-authored page. Like c'mon, just look at the thing. Have you ever seen that many citations on something that isn't just spamming them trying to stave off the Wikipedia police?

makes sense to maintain your own wikipedia page as an "about" page. but it's too much hassle for most people

... guess that's why it's comprehensive ^_^